A new developer has its sights set on the Rockaway quarry, a place that has crushed the dreams of so many developers who came before.

San Jose-based Barry Swenson Builder has made a bid for the vacant 87-acre limestone quarry, according to Pacifica City Manager Steve Rhodes. Florida-based developer R. Donahue Peebles put the property up for sale in 2009 after his team failed to persuade a majority of Pacifica voters in November 2006 to approve his proposal for the site.

Rhodes said Tuesday he did not have any sense of the new developer’s vision for the quarry, particularly in regard to the most crucial question: whether the company intends to build housing. A housing proposal would automatically trigger a public vote.

The status of Barry Swenson Builder’s bid is also unclear. A company representative did not reply to calls or e-mails this week.

“All I know is there’s some sort of conditional offer that’s been made,” Rhodes said. “I guess they think there’s some potential there.”

They wouldn’t be the first. Even before Peebles Corp. proposed a 355-unit mixed-use retail community with a luxury hotel, Pacifica voters rejected a mixed-use housing development proposed by Texas developer Trammel Crow in 2002. Voters rejected another plan to build housing in the former quarry in 1993.

Barry Swenson Builder has constructed many high-rise condominiums and mixed-use projects in downtown San Jose and is undertaking a major redevelopment project in downtown Morgan Hill. The company has some familiarity with Pacifica, having negotiated with the city about redeveloping its old wastewater treatment plant several years ago.

Depending on what’s proposed, the developer could encounter the same local opposition that has killed previous proposals for the quarry. Among other issues, residents have raised concerns about traffic congestion and the presence of federally protected species such as the California red-legged frog and the San Francisco garter snake.

Pacifica would surely benefit from any large development in the quarry, Rhodes said. But when it comes to building homes there, some types of proposals are likely more realistic than others.

“It may be the type of housing that’s the issue,” Rhodes said. “Everyone’s always proposed detached single-family dwellings. If we’re talking about housing, to me that’s not the kind of housing we should be talking about.”